USMC Mid-Air - F-35/KC-130
Having seen the latest picture I too wondered if any pf the prop blades or other debris had penetrated the fuselage. We usually tanked straight and level as I recall
(185 kts ?) except for the Falklands airbridge when we did the toboggan descent when tanking the freighter.. As far as I can recall all joins for fuel were commenced on the starboard wing where the Co could see them.
It must be remembered that the RAF C130 tanker only had one (80 ft) hose on the centreline through an aperture in the closed cargo door whereas the US C130 tankers use wing pods I believe.
(185 kts ?) except for the Falklands airbridge when we did the toboggan descent when tanking the freighter.. As far as I can recall all joins for fuel were commenced on the starboard wing where the Co could see them.
It must be remembered that the RAF C130 tanker only had one (80 ft) hose on the centreline through an aperture in the closed cargo door whereas the US C130 tankers use wing pods I believe.
How easy is it to tank a fast jet from a Herc compared to something like a KC135 or KC10? Idly wondering whether this incident is in part a consequence of the USMC's desire to maintain an independent tanking capability.
Not just USMC, USN must have the same issue. How practical would it be to have a carrier-borne boom equipped tanker?
Why would this be an issue? Like any other rejoin to any position, astern or to the wing, you always put your flight path marker below, beside or behind to aircraft you are joining, until very close and close to co-speed. If you hit it while on your way to the astern position, you would probably also hit it if cleared to the inside wing during a turning rejoin....
The point about joining the tanker in echelon means that you can come steaming in and then put the speedbrakes out whilst, as you pull level with the flight deck, announcing you've finally arrived from 70 miles away. Useful in EMCON silent conditions.
Surely you do have to be more circumspect when joining directly astern.
I remember during GW1 on a night towline in NW Saudi, a US Navy S-3 Viking had joined astern, plugged in and started taking fuel before the Eng had noticed. Had he joined on the left and moved abeam the flight deck, I would suggest it would have been safer.
Surely you do have to be more circumspect when joining directly astern.
I remember during GW1 on a night towline in NW Saudi, a US Navy S-3 Viking had joined astern, plugged in and started taking fuel before the Eng had noticed. Had he joined on the left and moved abeam the flight deck, I would suggest it would have been safer.
The picture overcomes a thousand words:
Double, simultaneous, uncontained failures in 3 and 4, going forward and shredding each individual prop?
I don't think so.
IG
Oops, beaten by Easy Street
Double, simultaneous, uncontained failures in 3 and 4, going forward and shredding each individual prop?
I don't think so.
IG
Oops, beaten by Easy Street
The J model herk is not bad as it can maintain a higher speed than the earlier models. With the earlier model herk you knew you were topped off when you stalled! Tactical tanking especially at low altitude in turbulence was always interesting. The F18 AOA probe was right under the refueling probe. Missing the basket sometimes resulted in knocking off the AOA probe which promptly went down the right intake! Missing the steel basket on the KC135 could result in a smashed canopy or holes in the aircraft. Disconnecting from that basket could be more critical than connecting. If you were not exactly in the position the basket would free stream in as you unplugged the basket would swing wildly around. Easiest by far is the KC10 with a big soft fluffy basket!
Afraid so TD, there are emergencies, and then there are emergencies, to differentiate there are two distinct words to inform the world of your state, MAYDAY and PAN. The first is self evident, PAN calls take priority over every other calls on the radio except MAYDAY calls and should be used when someone is not in grave an imminent danger and does not require immediate assistance, but has an urgent situation. The urgent situation may be the result of degradation of aircraft systems , you spot a boat, vehicle or aircraft needing urgent assistance, you get lost or need navigation assistance, when you need to break rules to stay safe etc etc. In the civil world ICAO doesn't recognise the word "Emergency", cases of pilots using "Emergency" or other phrases other than "pan-pan" and "mayday" have caused confusion and errors in aircraft handling by ATC.
https://www.hkatc.gov.hk/HK_AIP/aic/AIC21-12.pdf
https://www.hkatc.gov.hk/HK_AIP/aic/AIC21-12.pdf
I've time on the C130, and its a shame we are playing semantics when the Herc guy looks like he did such a great job! But... I'll bite! - after decades of sometimes pedantic sim sessions with a HK airline, I had cause to declare a Pan in Anchorage airspace. The controller simply asked " Err, are you declaring an Emergency?"..... K.I.S.S.
Probably better to leave it at that; let the USA sink back into its isolationist torpor and prevent air traffic in either direction. Put a big impermeable bubble over the whole country.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typical on pprune....
some people can’t live without trying their best to find something, anything wrong with what others pilots say or do.
He might have been under a tiny bit of stress, he got the message across. They did a damn good job.
but some cannot leave it be.
nit pick is the phrase.
some people can’t live without trying their best to find something, anything wrong with what others pilots say or do.
He might have been under a tiny bit of stress, he got the message across. They did a damn good job.
but some cannot leave it be.
nit pick is the phrase.
Boy you got that right. Can't believe some of the stuff I see in this forum. A giant smoking hole in the ground but damn the guy was perfect in his radiotelephoney right til impact. Whew!
The outrage bus must be full to bursting by now - goodness me some people need to get a sense of perspective.
When I first mentioned the lack of MAYDAY call it was an observation made after listening to the audio clip - I think the crew did a really great job getting the aircraft down safely - but the controller asks the pilot if he is declaring an emergency, something that would be made blindingly obvious by the use of MAYDAY.
I have no idea why the US Military have a different RT procedure to the rest of the world (including the FAA) but it seems counter-productive.
When I first mentioned the lack of MAYDAY call it was an observation made after listening to the audio clip - I think the crew did a really great job getting the aircraft down safely - but the controller asks the pilot if he is declaring an emergency, something that would be made blindingly obvious by the use of MAYDAY.
I have no idea why the US Military have a different RT procedure to the rest of the world (including the FAA) but it seems counter-productive.
Feel free to dissect what many of the pedants here believe is a systemic training issue of declaring emergency vs mayday/pan, however on that day, the phraseology that was most common to both the flight crew and the controller was “declaring an emergency”
Originally Posted by [email protected]
The outrage bus must be full to bursting by now - goodness me some people need to get a sense of perspective.
When I first mentioned the lack of MAYDAY call it was an observation made after listening to the audio clip - I think the crew did a really great job getting the aircraft down safely - but the controller asks the pilot if he is declaring an emergency, something that would be made blindingly obvious by the use of MAYDAY.
I have no idea why the US Military have a different RT procedure to the rest of the world (including the FAA) but it seems counter-productive.
When I first mentioned the lack of MAYDAY call it was an observation made after listening to the audio clip - I think the crew did a really great job getting the aircraft down safely - but the controller asks the pilot if he is declaring an emergency, something that would be made blindingly obvious by the use of MAYDAY.
I have no idea why the US Military have a different RT procedure to the rest of the world (including the FAA) but it seems counter-productive.
Might I politely draw the attention of our colonial chums to Para 1c (1)(a) of Section A-2 of the DoD Flight Information Handbook?
Anyhoo, all aircrew survived what could well have been a catastrophic event - some sound flying skills from that Marine aviator who saved his C-130 crew with multiple engine and system failures.
c. DISTRESS or URGENCY CALL and MESSAGE
(1) Transmit as many of the following elements as necessary:
(a) *Distress, MAYDAY (3 times) or **Urgency, PAN PAN (3 times).
(1) Transmit as many of the following elements as necessary:
(a) *Distress, MAYDAY (3 times) or **Urgency, PAN PAN (3 times).
